AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: CA 99  (Read 13716 times)

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #50 on: December 09, 2018, 05:57:01 PM »

^^^

And that's the thing, its like you said the HSR at best will act as a supplement to airline travel more than anything if its built.  I'd argue there is far more need for short line passenger rail service along CA 99 and US 101 than for a High Speed Rail.  I really just see where the passengers in high volume are going to come from, certainly I can't see there being enough demand to compete with current air and highway infrastructure. 


Back on the subject of CA 99, I drove from Sacramento back to Fresno this morning.  That being the case I took photos from US 50/CA 51 south to CA 145 to act as continuation to the first photo album and blog.  I ran into an issue where there was enough haze coupled with headlight glare around Stockton that I couldn't salvage my CA 4 Freeway interchange photos and a couple "Memorial Highway" placards.  I'll likely splice in a CA 4 freeway junction photo whenever the opportunity presents itself but with the Memorial Highways I'll just notate where they are in the blog if I'm missing a photo.  I did manage to pick up all the junctions with Signed County Routes that said...  Anyways, the Part 2 photos of CA 99 south from US 50/CA 51 to CA 145 can be found here:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/94B8g1

I took a crap ton of notes this time which help expedite the second blog being posted.  I should have it up later this week.  Unfortunately most of the Signed County Routes were Signed on CA 99 which means I値l have to give those exits context in the second blog post.

Some observations of note for CA 99 from US 50/CA 51:

-   The section between CA 165 to CA 140/59 in Merced is in terrible shape just as Sparker has pointed out.  The road is being repaired near Atwater but an expansion is needed.
-  CA 99 south from CA 152 to the Fresno County line needs an expansion to six lanes as well.  Traffic in Madera is particularly heavy and bottlenecks easily south of CA 145 to Avenue 7. 
-  The HOV lanes around Elk Grove really ought to go, I don't see why a conventional six-lane configuration won't work there.  Oddly the four-lane section south to Lodi in my observation probably the most sub-standard.  At minimum the traffic on CA 99 drops south of Elk Grove really until Stockton.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2018, 06:09:34 PM by Max Rockatansky »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8045
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:54:17 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #51 on: December 09, 2018, 08:41:15 PM »

^^^^^^^
Interestingly, one of the earlier (late '70's) CA 99 expansions to 6 lanes was the Stockton-Lodi segment.  Apparently there was anticipation of large-scale housing developments flanking the freeway at that time, and Caltrans, urged on by San Joaquin County, did the expansion.  As it turns out, those housing developments didn't occur until about 20 years later as part of the Valley affordable-housing alternatives to rising Bay Area prices -- but they centered on I-5 to the west, and for the most part these larger tracts didn't get too far east of County Road J8 (aka Franklin Blvd.)  And in the ensuing years, the land around CA 99 has itself increased in value -- but as a location for vineyards to the burgeoning Lodi-area wine business -- assisted in no small part by the designation of the area between Stockton and Galt as a specifically recognized wine-producing region with the commensurate increase in wineries, including many geared toward the tourist trade (another area to the south between French Camp and Modesto has been lobbying for similar status but hasn't found success at that as of yet).  So the land around CA 99 hasn't been inundated with housing -- but wineries with tasting rooms are cropping up with increasing regularity! 
Logged

MrAndy1369

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 34
  • Last Login: October 20, 2020, 02:37:55 PM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #52 on: December 12, 2018, 02:41:52 PM »

An idea just popped up my head. If CA-99/70/65 north of Sacramento/Roseville ever eventually becomes expanded to interstate standards all the way to Red Bluff, what would you think of designating the segments north of Sacramento and CA-99 between Sacramento and Los Angeles as I-5E? Then the original I-5 can become I-5W concurrently? It'd be easier than having to scramble for a 3di xx5, and I'd think current CA-99 all the way would be too long for a 3di anyway, but it'd also be a waste of a new 2di, especially given it'd be only intra-state. I-5W/E may be a bit 'plain' and boring, but it'd be pretty easy to implement, and people would adjust accordingly.

I can imagine it'd be easy to say "hey, let's take I-5W from Los Angeles to San Francisco!" and "hmm, I'd say I-5E from San Diego to Fresno may be faster." People would then see the split of I-5W/I-5E at the Grapevine and go accordingly.  :coffee:

Thoughts?
Logged

nexus73

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2189
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Coos Bay OR
  • Last Login: Today at 08:15:48 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #53 on: December 12, 2018, 03:19:19 PM »

An idea just popped up my head. If CA-99/70/65 north of Sacramento/Roseville ever eventually becomes expanded to interstate standards all the way to Red Bluff, what would you think of designating the segments north of Sacramento and CA-99 between Sacramento and Los Angeles as I-5E? Then the original I-5 can become I-5W concurrently? It'd be easier than having to scramble for a 3di xx5, and I'd think current CA-99 all the way would be too long for a 3di anyway, but it'd also be a waste of a new 2di, especially given it'd be only intra-state. I-5W/E may be a bit 'plain' and boring, but it'd be pretty easy to implement, and people would adjust accordingly.

I can imagine it'd be easy to say "hey, let's take I-5W from Los Angeles to San Francisco!" and "hmm, I'd say I-5E from San Diego to Fresno may be faster." People would then see the split of I-5W/I-5E at the Grapevine and go accordingly.  :coffee:

Thoughts?

Sounds plausible to me!  Being "old school", I would rather bring back US 99 but if we are going to use Interstate routing, 5E and 5W will do just fine.

Rick
Logged
US 101 is THE backbone of the Pacific coast from Bandon OR to Willets CA.  Industry, tourism and local traffic would be gone or severely crippled without it being in functioning condition in BOTH states.

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #54 on: December 15, 2018, 11:25:36 PM »

Went back and fixed the bad interchange photos with CA 4 East/West on the CA 99 (US 50/CA 51 to CA 145) Flickr album.  They are saved out of order but the file names line up correctly.  I'll have them in a in the right order when I do my second CA 99/US 99 freeway blog post:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/870665

Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8045
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:54:17 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #55 on: December 16, 2018, 02:18:32 PM »

An idea just popped up my head. If CA-99/70/65 north of Sacramento/Roseville ever eventually becomes expanded to interstate standards all the way to Red Bluff, what would you think of designating the segments north of Sacramento and CA-99 between Sacramento and Los Angeles as I-5E? Then the original I-5 can become I-5W concurrently? It'd be easier than having to scramble for a 3di xx5, and I'd think current CA-99 all the way would be too long for a 3di anyway, but it'd also be a waste of a new 2di, especially given it'd be only intra-state. I-5W/E may be a bit 'plain' and boring, but it'd be pretty easy to implement, and people would adjust accordingly.

I can imagine it'd be easy to say "hey, let's take I-5W from Los Angeles to San Francisco!" and "hmm, I'd say I-5E from San Diego to Fresno may be faster." People would then see the split of I-5W/I-5E at the Grapevine and go accordingly.  :coffee:

Thoughts?

Sounds plausible to me!  Being "old school", I would rather bring back US 99 but if we are going to use Interstate routing, 5E and 5W will do just fine.

Rick

Still think that there's absolutely nothing wrong with dipping into the pool of unused numbers for this or any reasonable corridor (it's not part of a roadgeek version of "football fantasy" where numbers are hoarded for future use); I-7 still would be the most reasonable -- and Caltrans-friendly -- option here as well as being quite rational, the corridor being a maximum of about 60-odd miles east of I-5.  Don't think CA needs to replicate the TX suffixed trend quite yet.  As it sits, CA 99 is definitely its own corridor with both local and interregional purposes; identifying it as such rather than an adjunct of I-5 would do the trick regarding increasing attractiveness to commercial interests looking to establish warehouse/distribution facilities.  I've railed about the initial overselling of "major" (i.e. those ending in "0" or "5") numbers back in the '50's that led to such weird anomalies as an I-80N (Portland) being situated some 600 miles north of I-80 and a distortion of the overall grid pattern as a result.  A suffixed/3d reference to I-5 won't buy anything a new trunk designation wouldn't.  And at 30+ available, there are more numbers left in the "pool" than realistic places to put them, so it's not like picking I-7 would deprive any of the Western states of future selections.  When it comes time to actually redesignate CA 99, either I-7 or I-9 would be appropriate, with the former a bit easier to deal with internally. 
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3032
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: Today at 03:33:40 PM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #56 on: December 18, 2018, 04:45:37 PM »

Since the 210 extension is still a state highway, and SR-15 and SR-905 haven't been converted to Interstates yet, I don't see the SR-99 corridor becoming an Interstate either anytime soon, if ever.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #57 on: December 18, 2018, 11:19:34 PM »

Finished the second blog post in the CA 99/Old US 99 Freeway series.  The second part covers the CA 99 Freeway south from Sacramento at US 50/CA 51 (the I-80 Business Loop) south to CA 145 in Madera.  The first blog had various links to major original alignments of US 99 from Bakersfield through Fresno.  The second blog has map links and general time periods for alignment shifts in US 99.  The most substantial alignment history that I reviewed was in Stockton which included US 99, US 99W, and US 99E before US 50 was extended to the Bay Area.

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2018/12/california-state-route-99old-us-route.html
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8045
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:54:17 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #58 on: December 19, 2018, 01:26:47 AM »

Since the 210 extension is still a state highway, and SR-15 and SR-905 haven't been converted to Interstates yet, I don't see the SR-99 corridor becoming an Interstate either anytime soon, if ever.

Yeah, Caltrans can and does at best move glacially about anything to do with designation and signage; their motto seems to be "when in doubt, procrastinate!"  Still, many of the BGS's on intersecting roads out around Upland and Rancho Cucamonga still have the CA 210 shield on greenout slabs over I-210 shields -- so it's clear that either the agency in general or D8 in particular envision that freeway as I-210 at a time TBD later.  There are some narrow bridges & inner shoulders on the older section through the north part of San Bernardino; these just might be holding up the process -- but not something being prioritized at this time.  And the issues with CA-15 and CA-905 are pretty straightforward:  the 15/94 interchange upgrade -- again -- hasn't been prioritized, and constant construction along 905 (I've never seen more programmed "phases" of development on such a short route in CA before!) has delayed re-signage.  But with all Caltrans has on its plate these days -- including programming projects on county/local facilities -- signage concerns (obviously) are well down the "to do" list.  But Interstate designation for the three routes mentioned is all but inevitable -- but Caltrans is in no hurry to add that chore to its plate anytime soon. 

But the political scene in the Valley, with the almost-solid Republican bloc along the CA 99 corridor being upended in the last election, is probably going to result in focus on that region in 2020, with the Democrats who won (generally with slim margins) looking to shore up their local support, and the remaining Republicans (including the incoming minority leader from Bakersfield!) trying to dig moats around their districts (McCarthy's is about the only one reasonably safe down the road in either party).  Pulling a two-part trick like actually designating an Interstate number for the corridor and securing as much Federal $$ as possible to expedite any upgrades might be well within the electoral methodology here; incumbent ineffectiveness in the "bringing home the pork product" was one of the key factors affecting the recent turnover.   It's a safe bet that both the new and old Congresspersons in the region will be quickly looking for ways to nail down this aspect of their duties -- and despite the "take it or leave it" attitude within CA state agencies, calling attention and not a few bucks to the CA 99 corridor might just do the trick for these folks!
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3032
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: Today at 03:33:40 PM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #59 on: December 19, 2018, 04:44:41 PM »

That's a very interesting analysis, sparker. Thanks!
Logged

splashflash

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 58
  • Location: Vancouver Island
  • Last Login: Today at 05:45:36 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #60 on: July 19, 2019, 10:51:52 PM »

Additional lanes on CA-99 in Madera

Construction starts Aug. 5 to add a lane on the northbound side, as well as the southbound side, between Avenue 12 and Avenue 17. The work is set to happen at night to avoid commuters.

It痴 slated to end summer 2020.

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/two-new-lanes-coming-to-a-madera-county-stretch-of-highway-99/
« Last Edit: July 19, 2019, 10:54:14 PM by splashflash »
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #61 on: July 20, 2019, 01:20:42 AM »

Additional lanes on CA-99 in Madera

Construction starts Aug. 5 to add a lane on the northbound side, as well as the southbound side, between Avenue 12 and Avenue 17. The work is set to happen at night to avoid commuters.

It痴 slated to end summer 2020.

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/two-new-lanes-coming-to-a-madera-county-stretch-of-highway-99/

That still leaves a four lane gap south to Avenue 7 and the County Line. 
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8045
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:54:17 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #62 on: July 20, 2019, 02:45:12 AM »

Additional lanes on CA-99 in Madera

Construction starts Aug. 5 to add a lane on the northbound side, as well as the southbound side, between Avenue 12 and Avenue 17. The work is set to happen at night to avoid commuters.

It痴 slated to end summer 2020.

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/two-new-lanes-coming-to-a-madera-county-stretch-of-highway-99/

That still leaves a four lane gap south to Avenue 7 and the County Line. 

The section through central Madera shouldn't pose any issues; it's had enough room in the median for an additional lane plus ample shoulders for somewhere around two decades.  I'd probably guess that the presence of this ready-to-go segment plus the high level of growth right in and around the city of Madera prompted the prioritization of this particular stretch.  I'd guess ensuing years will see projects let both north and south of this one in order to fully 6-lane the section from Fresno to the CA 152 "split".   Farther north, upgrading the Chowchilla bypass will be a really extensive as well as expensive project; addressing the number of under-height overcrossings alone will probably eat up a chunk of change.  And the old "99 hallmark", the over/under RR crossing just north of the 152 interchange will have to go; the underpass is both under-height and narrow.   Chowchilla will probably be the last stretch in Madera County to see upgrades simply because of the multiple issues and the cost of dealing with them.     
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 507
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: June 13, 2021, 10:25:19 AM
    • California Highways
Re: CA 99
« Reply #63 on: August 22, 2019, 02:04:35 AM »

While driving near Le Grand today, I noticed that Silviera Way has Route 99 bridge markers with postmiles, but is not part of 99, nor former 99 to my knowledge. Any ideas why?
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #64 on: August 22, 2019, 08:37:28 AM »

While driving near Le Grand today, I noticed that Silviera Way has Route 99 bridge markers with postmiles, but is not part of 99, nor former 99 to my knowledge. Any ideas why?

My GPS used to jump there to Silviera Way thinking it was 99 until I updated the data.  I just assumed it might have been just a really old alignment that was showing up on bad map data.  I noticed with the Lanes Bridge in Fresno that it showed up on the same post mileage as the mainline freeway.  Maybe Caltrans constructed said bridge and just rolled it into the mainline post mileage?
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 507
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: June 13, 2021, 10:25:19 AM
    • California Highways
Re: CA 99
« Reply #65 on: August 22, 2019, 09:53:29 AM »

As you drive up 99 in that area, there are a bunch of bridges like that along the side road. I'll keep my eyes open for other oddities (we're doing 99-5-97 on the way up, and 139-36-32-5-99 on the way back from vacation).
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #66 on: August 22, 2019, 01:02:13 PM »

The Klamath trip I知 assuming?  I値l be curious to see what your take on 139 is, I致e had that one on my to-do list for years.  With 99 I noticed that in almost every area that has been recently upgraded you値l see newer structures on frontage facilities as well.  I値l have to keep my eye out the next time I drive through Goshen since that whole segment is essentially brand new. 
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8045
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:54:17 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #67 on: August 22, 2019, 01:08:29 PM »

The area where this is occurring is along that last segment of 99 to be converted to full freeway between the Madera county line and the southern outskirts of Merced.  While it was being constructed, traffic -- in both directions -- was diverted onto what was a constantly changing set of alignments consisting of portions of the original highway (situated near the adjacent RR line), completed carriageways of the new freeway wherever feasible, or one or another of the frontage roads (one of which functionally replaced the old alignment on the west side of the freeway).  Unusual for D10, the design featured quite a bit of frontage roads -- but those would flank the freeway for a while and eventually curve off as part of the local grid (D6 to the south really liked frontage roads in rural areas, but those tended to hug the flanks of the freeway quite closely and only occasionally segued into local grid patterns -- but then, that section of 99 was oriented much more N-S than the section near Merced, which is almost a 45-degree diagonal.  With all the changes and temporary alignments serving as through lanes of CA 99 during the long construction process, it's likely that some frontage-road bridges were mileposted along the way -- and that at some point the Google car came through, which would tend to archive one or another of the interim configurations -- and subsequently show up on GE/GSV when specific road names are keyed in.  When I saw the "Reply #63" post, I immediately googled up Silveira -- and it pointed to the east frontage road.  Although the nearest community referenced was Athlone, Le Grand, about 5 miles to the east along the mostly parallel BNSF tracks, is probably the USPS reference town for the immediate area. 
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 507
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: June 13, 2021, 10:25:19 AM
    • California Highways
Re: CA 99
« Reply #68 on: August 23, 2019, 12:47:47 AM »

The Klamath trip I知 assuming?  I値l be curious to see what your take on 139 is, I致e had that one on my to-do list for years.  With 99 I noticed that in almost every area that has been recently upgraded you値l see newer structures on frontage facilities as well.  I値l have to keep my eye out the next time I drive through Goshen since that whole segment is essentially brand new. 

Yup. Today, because we were running a bit ahead, we did a bit on Old 99W, and then detoured into Williams, took 20 to Colusa, up 45 to Glenn, across 162 back to I-5 (and the Coffee Shop at the Willows Airport is great!), and then up I-5. We wanted to hit the outlets in Anderson, so we took 273 up, and we're staying tonight right where 273 and 44 come together. Tomorrow (assuming the fire near Sherman doesn't grow) we'll be going up I-5 and US 97 into Oregon. Over the week, we'll also be driving OR 66 to Ashland.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #69 on: August 23, 2019, 12:56:51 AM »

The Klamath trip I知 assuming?  I値l be curious to see what your take on 139 is, I致e had that one on my to-do list for years.  With 99 I noticed that in almost every area that has been recently upgraded you値l see newer structures on frontage facilities as well.  I値l have to keep my eye out the next time I drive through Goshen since that whole segment is essentially brand new. 

Yup. Today, because we were running a bit ahead, we did a bit on Old 99W, and then detoured into Williams, took 20 to Colusa, up 45 to Glenn, across 162 back to I-5 (and the Coffee Shop at the Willows Airport is great!), and then up I-5. We wanted to hit the outlets in Anderson, so we took 273 up, and we're staying tonight right where 273 and 44 come together. Tomorrow (assuming the fire near Sherman doesn't grow) we'll be going up I-5 and US 97 into Oregon. Over the week, we'll also be driving OR 66 to Ashland.

OR 66 should be interesting given it was early US 97.  I'm to understand when Emigrant Lake is low the original junction of US 97 at US 99 can be seen from Old Greensprings Highway.  Interestingly Jessica and I will be on something of an Oregon kick next month ourselves.  We're heading up to Portland for her birthday and we're hitting Lassen, Crater Lake and Redwood for my mine.  I'm hoping for some new photo stock for; US 97, CA 161, US 199, CA 200, CA 255, CA 96, CA 3, CA 273, some of CA 44 in Redding and CA 151.   If you see anything else worthwhile in your travels let us known. 
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8045
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:54:17 AM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #70 on: August 23, 2019, 10:28:40 AM »

^^^^^^^^^
If you're in the Yreka area at any time during your journey, be sure to take a little detour on CA 263 through the Shasta River canyon -- it'll certainly provide the rationale for Caltrans' decision to reroute I-5 over Anderson Grade (a major mountain construction effort if there ever was one!) rather than try to shove it through that gorge.  Also -- a bit SE of there -- the old US 97 alignment from Bray to Macdoel essentially following the original SP Klamath line is a nice detour from the present route and definitely worth doing!
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #71 on: August 23, 2019, 11:27:57 AM »

^^^^^^^^^
If you're in the Yreka area at any time during your journey, be sure to take a little detour on CA 263 through the Shasta River canyon -- it'll certainly provide the rationale for Caltrans' decision to reroute I-5 over Anderson Grade (a major mountain construction effort if there ever was one!) rather than try to shove it through that gorge.  Also -- a bit SE of there -- the old US 97 alignment from Bray to Macdoel essentially following the original SP Klamath line is a nice detour from the present route and definitely worth doing!

We池e staying in Yreka, so I値l be catching 263 south to 3 to get to the hotel.  I forgot that I値l be checking out 265 as well.  I知 torn on deciding which vehicle I want to bring, something tells me I値l want something that can handle some unpaved surfaces. 
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 507
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: June 13, 2021, 10:25:19 AM
    • California Highways
Re: CA 99
« Reply #72 on: August 24, 2019, 12:10:32 AM »

What I found interesting today was the separation of alignments between Redding and Dunsmuir through the Mount Shasta area. Reminded me of Southern California towards the Grapevine.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 15114
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:38 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 99
« Reply #73 on: August 24, 2019, 12:15:00 AM »

There is a ton of stuff related to US 99 around Lake Shasta that is worth a look.  Joel Windmiller is always posting stuff from the Lake Shasta Area and Southern Oregon on the Historic US 99 Facebook page.  I know there are a couple bridges that are probably worth the detour to see, I'll have to get them plotted out before late September. 
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2721
  • Last Login: June 13, 2021, 10:04:12 PM
Re: CA 99
« Reply #74 on: August 24, 2019, 06:51:56 AM »

The Klamath trip I知 assuming?  I値l be curious to see what your take on 139 is, I致e had that one on my to-do list for years.  With 99 I noticed that in almost every area that has been recently upgraded you値l see newer structures on frontage facilities as well.  I値l have to keep my eye out the next time I drive through Goshen since that whole segment is essentially brand new. 

Yup. Today, because we were running a bit ahead, we did a bit on Old 99W, and then detoured into Williams, took 20 to Colusa, up 45 to Glenn, across 162 back to I-5 (and the Coffee Shop at the Willows Airport is great!), and then up I-5. We wanted to hit the outlets in Anderson, so we took 273 up, and we're staying tonight right where 273 and 44 come together. Tomorrow (assuming the fire near Sherman doesn't grow) we'll be going up I-5 and US 97 into Oregon. Over the week, we'll also be driving OR 66 to Ashland.

Don't forget to snag OR 273 (the old Syskiyou route for US 99). It is signed -- exactly once, as you start climbing south from OR 66. If you clinch it right, your turn around point will be exit 796 at Hilt.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.